287 
(The information follows:) 
Several actions have been taken to modify our permit procedures: 
we ne Reece ee February 1970) to Division Bngineers that en- 
e Refuse Act (33 U.S.C. ifi ithi 
capabilities. (33 U.S.C. 407) should be intensified within 
4 b. Procedures were established on 30 April 1970 for processing permit applica- 
tions under provisions of the Water Quality Improvement Act of 1970 (state 
certification, etc.) and for the preparation of the 5-point statement prescribed 
in the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 
ce. A new permit form was adopted which includes more stringent requirements 
for protection of the environment. 
d. On 19 May 1970, regulations for processing permits were revised to: 
(1) Require applicants whose proposals involve outfall works to fully identify 
the effluent. 
(2) Clarify the responsibilities of the Corp of Engineers and the Department 
of the Interior with respect to oil drilling operations on the Outer Continental 
Shelf. The new regulations note that the Department of the Interior is responsible 
for considering the impact which such operations may have on the total environ- 
ment at the time of the selection of submerged lands of the Outer Continental 
Shelf for inclusion in the mineral leasing program administered by Interior, but 
provides for consideration by the Corps of the ‘impact of the proposed work on 
navigation and national security.” 
(3) Limit use of “Letters of Permission” to those cases involving minor work 
where impact on environmental values is not significant. 
e. On 27 May 1970, all existing and future harbor lines were declared to be 
guidelines for defining, with respect to the impact on navigation interest alone, 
the offshore limits of open pile structures or fills. A permit is now required for 
any work shoreward of harbor lines. 
f. On 29 July 1970, the Army announced that permits would be required under 
the Refuse Act (33 U.S.C. 407) for all discharges into navigable waters. In an- 
nouncing this requirement, a need for additional funds and personnel was in- 
dicated. Budget action will be required. 
(Committee Note: See Committee hearings 91-41, Appendix B, for 
sec. 103 statement submitted by the Corps of Engineers.) 
Mr. Drnceti. General, the committee thanks you for your presence 
today and the gentlemen who accompany you. 
There may be some questions the Chair will be in touch with you 
on. The one point the Chair mentioned earlier is the intention of the 
subcommittee to move very vigorously on the legislation before us 
and we would, of course, very much for that reason appreciate your 
assistance in arriving at the appropriate and proper language which 
will make it most effective for proper administration. We thank you. 
Mr. Carl Pope, representative of the Zero Population Growth. 
STATEMENT OF CARL D. POPE, REPRESENTING ZERO POPULATION 
GROWTH 
Mr. Porr. I am Carl Pope, the Washington representative of the 
Zero Population Growth. A statement by Mr. Alderson, who unfortu- 
nately has been unable to be here today, has been submitted to the 
committee. 
Mr. Dinceru. Counsel so advises me and without objection Mr. 
Alderson’s statement will be inserted in the record at the appropriate 
part. 
Mr. Porr. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 
Zero Population Growth strongly supports the goals and approach 
of H.R. 19359, which we believe to be substantially superior to exist- 
